Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 348 U.S. 272 - Tee-Hit-Ton Indians v. United States

Tee-Hit-Ton Indians v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

1955

Citation profile

406
cited by 406 later decisions
15
cited 15 times by the Supreme Court
9
states following
March 2023
most recently cited

133 federal appellate · 33 district · 29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 406 later decisions (15 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2023 · most notably Oneida Indian Nation of New York State v. County of Oneida New York (1974), Merrion v. Jicarilla Apache Tribe (1982)

133 federal appellate · 33 district · 29 state decisions

120019551960197019801990200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Applies 25 U.S.C. § 70 · 28 U.S.C. § 1505

Relies on United States v. General Motors Corp. · Samuel Worcester v. The State of Georgia · State of Minnesota v. Ethan Allen Hitchcock · Alaska Pacific Fisheries v. United States · United States v. Felipe Sandoval

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 406 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “means mere possession not specifically recognized as ownership by Congress.... This is not a property right but amounts to a right of occupancy which the sovereign grants and protects against intrusion by third parties but which right of occupancy may be terminated and such lands fully disposed of by the sovereign itself without any legally enforceable obligation to compensate the Indians.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[t]here is no particular form for congressional recognition of Indian right of permanent occupancy,”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Extinguishment of Indian title based on aboriginal possession is of course a different matter. The power of Congress in that regard is supreme. The manner, method and time of such extinguishment raise political, not justiciable, issues.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.